Certainly survey works similar to regarding an object such az khatam telephone that has decorative and functional aspects and also turn in concerns aesthetic judgment about this subject needs some knowledge about the beautiful.
Making an aesthetic judgment regarding the beautiful is possible only through my experience, interest, taste and etc.
There is certainly some doubt that I can definitely name something as a work of art. Unless at last some part of this system to decorate with khatam has a history in Iranian traditional arts. But maybe it could not create one artistic work if it is synthetic. because part of this work is applied part that is mass produced massly as a modern produc. in factories and it is for modernist period that decorate by traditional art. Perhaps of necessity compounding modern works with traditional art could not necessarily be ugly and worthless from the aesthetic viewpoint .But It is very important what the intention behind a modern work is..
Perhaps it is bettert to say that modern artworks combining modern and traditional artwork can unite artwork and beautyl.
But this is not completely correct in very case.
Since generalizing a theory can never be very precise or true.
But telephone completely has functional aspect and when it is an industrial product and is produced in modernist period,it is acceptable that its appearance matches its period.on the other hand ,it is only acceptable if it is simple and far from of decoration.
Perhaps it is due to being an industrial outcome,a mass produced product,low time,high orders,simplicity,…
Because anyway embellishment is a time consuming work while device like phone produces accumulate and have too many orders , so ultimately its production decrease with these embellishments and this has inverse relation with time and high production.It means too much embellishments equals with too much time consuming and few production that naturally make difficult. So most of industrial production have not nice and time consuming embellishments and it Is tried to make simpler ones. Now if we want to apply an embellishment like marquetry-that its difficulty and delicacy is appeared for all-on this industrial production ,how deteriorate its production!
One of reasons that addressee like me does not satisfy to see this embellishment on an industrial production , is accepting this production as it produces. Means if the basics of production in an object is based on embellishment , so it does not mean without it like designs on a carpet and if the basics is based on application and the embellishment is just accessories ineffective it would seem uncommon. About marquetry on telephone device, we can find out simply that these embellishments do not play any role in its function and is just accessory element merely decorative. This it is criticized easily .Of course this is not right permanently , but in this case we can use it as a reason of inelegance .

In my opinion ,such a product decorated with khatam is not an acceptable thing . Perhaps because I have usually seen khatam on objects l like penholder,tray,vase,table…and my presupposition about khatam is that it should be used only on such objects, therefore when I hearthe name of khatam ,I imagine these objects in my mind which are derived from my experience about art.

In other hand, the experience that exists in my mind of this decorative art does not allow me to believe it on an unknown object traditionally . This aesthetic experience is right in many similar cases. For example using damascene cushions with BOTE JEGHE braided on IKEA furniture and/or using flower and bush designs for casing of Roize-roize chairs . Absolutely using these embellishments in cases which do not relate together by date, place and concept is comic or surprising.
In my view date , culture ,concept and place could have an important role in our judgment of objects.

When a telephone is decorated with this art ,I think what happens is that distraction or art rule is broken and I am surprised by looking at this work or consider it meaningless .
The aim of deformation is mixing believes which are made during the last experience of object. In phone device, its simpleness loses suddenly with replacing very delicate embellishments and deteriorate addressee conceptual habit to device that its result to him/her would be shock and often can’t make any relationship between two –phone and embellishment , so assumes it meaningless .

It is similar my mobile being decorated by khatam.It is never interesting for me, because I have observed khatam just used on a few kind of objects.
On the other hand ,khatam is a very delicate work that it is very onerous , therefore this art should be respected and have an honorable position. Maybe the reason would be the simpleness of phone device that makes by industrial systems and difficulty of marquetry art that is done by human power and also the grade of phone function that is among common devices and this indifference relate to phone device with marquetry art does not adapt which its value and credit is because of its composition . The phone is an object for man day to day needs while marquetry art produces just to satisfy spiritual needs and enjoyment to show man art.

When this valuable art is used for industrial means ,the value and worth of this art will decrease, because it is used for industrial production. It is in service of an object that produces accumulate so that lacks artistic value .When we see an inlaid work on a building or a thing hung on wall we just think to value of marquetry art and admire its elegance and delicacy . But when an object like phone would be inlaid by this art , decreases the value of marquetry art down to an applied and unimportant object .
The industry that its production is just benefits to meet day to day needs.

I think we could not use every decorative art for decorating every thing and call it beautiful.
It is very important that embellishment adapt with inlaid object and the form and shape and the marquetry doesn’t fit with object in this way .

Perhaps the most important reason is that telephone is a man made artificial thing and it could not be termed art that decorated with khatam. We can’t call phone device an artistic work because its function feature is more important than its decorative one. This object however to be decorated , though it is used as consuming device and if we want to call a functional object as artistic work , it is better put it in artistic works place means museums and home vitrines.

Maybe manufacturing technique causes deep crack between the art of khatam and telephone.